Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro

Side-by-side benchmark comparison across coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing.

Gemini 3.1 Pro by Google wins on 5 of 7 benchmarks against Claude Fable 5 by Anthropic, which leads on 1. This head-to-head comparison covers coding, math, reasoning, speed, and pricing metrics from the AI Value Index.

Category-by-Category Breakdown

Coding: In coding, Claude Fable 5 scores 95.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to Gemini 3.1 Pro's 80.6%.

Reasoning: In reasoning, Gemini 3.1 Pro scores 94.1% on GPQA Diamond compared to Claude Fable 5's 92.6%.

Context: In context, both score 1.0M on Context Length.

Pricing Comparison

Claude Fable 5 costs $10.0/1M input tokens and $50.0/1M output tokens, while Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.0/1M input and $12.0/1M output. Gemini 3.1 Pro is the more affordable option for API usage.

Speed Comparison

Claude Fable 5 generates output at 60 tok/s compared to Gemini 3.1 Pro's 65 tok/s, and the time to first token is 81680 ms for Claude Fable 5 versus 420 ms for Gemini 3.1 Pro. Gemini 3.1 Pro delivers faster throughput.

Verdict

For developers prioritizing coding, Claude Fable 5 has the edge. For those who value affordability and speed, Gemini 3.1 Pro is the stronger choice.

Models:Claude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Pro

Chatbot Arena ELO(ELO)

Human preference ELO from blind head-to-head votes

Higher is better

1501

MMLU-Pro(%)

Massive Multitask Language Understanding professional benchmark

Higher is better

92.6%

HumanEval+(%)

Code generation correctness with extended tests

Higher is better

93.0%

IFEval(%)

Strict instruction following accuracy on verifiable constraints

Higher is better

92.0%

MATH(%)

Competition mathematics problem solving

Higher is better

93.0%

SWE-bench Verified(%)

Real-world software engineering task resolution

Higher is better

95.0%80.6%

GPQA Diamond(%)

Graduate-level science Q&A by domain experts

Higher is better

92.6%94.1%

Output Speed(tok/s)

Tokens generated per second

Higher is better

6065

Time to First Token(ms)

Latency before first token arrives

Lower is better

81680420

LiveCodeBench(%)

Live competitive programming benchmark

Higher is better

75.0%

Input Cost($/1M)

Cost per 1M input tokens

Lower is better

$10.0$2.0

Output Cost($/1M)

Cost per 1M output tokens

Lower is better

$50.0$12.0

GSM8K(%)

Grade school math word problems

Higher is better

98.0%

AIME 2025(%)

American Invitational Mathematics Examination — competition math

Higher is better

95.0%

ARC-AGI(%)

Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus for general intelligence

Higher is better

77.1%

Context Length(tokens)

Maximum context window size

Higher is better

1.0M1.0M

View Individual Model Pages

Claude Fable 5 Details Gemini 3.1 Pro Details

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro — FAQ

Which is better, Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro wins on more benchmarks overall (5 vs 1). However, the best choice depends on your specific needs — each model excels in different areas.

How does Claude Fable 5 compare to Gemini 3.1 Pro for coding?

Claude Fable 5 is better for coding, scoring 95.0% on SWE-bench Verified compared to 80.6%. SWE-bench tests real-world software engineering by resolving actual GitHub issues.

Is Claude Fable 5 cheaper than Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Yes, Gemini 3.1 Pro is cheaper. Claude Fable 5 costs $10.0/1M input and $50.0/1M output tokens. Gemini 3.1 Pro costs $2.0/1M input and $12.0/1M output tokens.

Which is faster, Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro?

Gemini 3.1 Pro is faster, generating output at 65 tok/s compared to 60 tok/s. Faster output speed means shorter wait times for API responses.

What benchmarks does the Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro comparison cover?

This comparison covers 7 benchmarks including SWE-bench Verified, GPQA Diamond, Output Speed, Time to First Token, Input Cost, Output Cost, Context Length. Metrics span general intelligence, coding, math, reasoning, speed, and cost categories.